Areas where climbing is banned...
Sydney Harbour National Park (North Head and other crags)
Balls Head (council land)
Ku-ring-gai Chase National park (e.g. Kalkari)
St Georges River National park (Alfords Point and a swag of other sutherland climbing areas)
Bouddi National Park
Royal National Park
Brisbane Waters National Park
Berowra Waters Regional Park
Hanging Rock
Girraween
thats just getting started, want more?

Placing bolts above a public walking track in an area where climbing access is delicate is a great way to get climbing banned. One persons dumb actions can ruin it for everyone.

Climbing access is 'delicate' in all conservation areas - this includes all national parks. The exact situation varies from area to area but the general gist is bolts are not appreciated by land managers for those areas. Bolts are not considered consistent with conservation values and are also perceived as a liability risk.

By placing bolts in public places you are drawing attention to climbing and to the placement of bolts. Land managers will feel compelled to act.

Even in areas where conservation is not a high priority, the plan of management for an area is what decides whether climbing is allowed or not. If you place bolts in a place that non-climbers can see, those non-climbers may not like to see bolts and will put submissions to the plan of management review process recommending climbing be banned. All stakeholder submissions are considered when drawing up plans of management and climbers are likely to lose access if there is sufficient anti-climber sentiment. Three examples of this, Hanging Rock, Girraween, Berowra Waters.

Trad route - so not due to complaints about ugly bolts.
Climbing on this route is banned because the path leads all the way around the unusually thin and long rock on either side.
One dropped biner or kicked stone could cause serious injury or death to unsuspecting persons below (climber, walker, small child....)

Qld probably has the highest concentration of closed crags in the country. To my knowledge none of the closures are due to bolting. I think one of the bigger crags is actually owned by a climber of some sort and very few people have climbed there since it was bought. Don't know anymore than that.

Rockford in the Royal National Park is banned. They even chopped bolts there didnt they?

Its worth remembering, right now NPWS dont have a budget to police this, so if we dont show restraint, banning is a viable option.

Terry, I know you will read this and you know Im actually doing project work with NPWS down this way at the moment. Believe me, they're not happy about bolting anywhere on their turf. Im actually having ongoing discussions with the ranger at Bungonia who maintains bolting is illegal anywhere in an NP, which is strictly true.

Edit - Yeah, the last line was stating the obvious so I'll wipe it to avoid the silly replies.

On 21/11/2012 martym wrote:>On 21/11/2012 Olbert wrote:>>Breadknife (Warrumbungles)>>Trad route - so not due to complaints about ugly bolts.>Climbing on this route is banned because the path leads all the way around>the unusually thin and long rock on either side. >One dropped biner or kicked stone could cause serious injury or death>to unsuspecting persons below (climber, walker, small child....)

?
I thought the tourist track was on the east side only, and climbing was allowed on the west side.

On 21/11/2012 Sonic wrote:>Rockford in the Royal National Park is banned. They even chopped bolts>there didnt they?>>Its worth remembering, right now NPWS dont have a budget to police this,>so if we dont show restraint, banning is a viable option.>>Terry, I know you will read this and you know Im actually doing project>work with NPWS down this way at the moment. Believe me, they're not happy>about bolting anywhere on their turf. Im actually having ongoing discussions>with the ranger at Bungonia who maintains bolting is illegal anywhere in>an NP, which is strictly true.

And this is the issue that no one seems to acknowledge. I'm still a pretty "new" climber, and it still amazes me that-

On 21/11/2012 Sonic wrote:>Believe me, they're not happy about bolting>anywhere on their turf. Im actually having ongoing discussions with the>ranger at Bungonia who maintains bolting is illegal and said theyre prepared>to fine anyone they catch on their watch.

On 21/11/2012 Olbert wrote:>The Pom mentions climbing as a permitted activity. It does not mention>bolting and does specifically say bush walkers are a priority.

Ok Ollie - heres a whole load of ammunition. Gotta love bureaucracy.

From the Illawarra Escarpment SCA PoM -
"The west and south-facing cliffs of Mount Keira are used for rock climbing and
abseiling, and this has resulted in numerous bolted climbs and the creation of
informal access tracks. These activities will continue to be permitted provided safety
standards and environmental impacts are acceptable."

and then in the management response -
"4.6.14 Permit rock climbing and abseiling only on the south and west-facing cliff lines
of Mount Keira, as long as it is undertaken in a safe and environmentally
acceptable manner."

Now I'll take my climber hat off and put my land manager hat on. Only the west face and south face are open to climbing. Not the north face, not the east face, not the landslide and not the boulders above the track. The statement also does NOT say more can be bolted, merely that the existing bolted climbs can continue to be climbed. The real kicker is the line

" These activities will continue to be permitted provided safety
standards and environmental impacts are acceptable."

This is interpreted to say only authorised people can install bolts and unfortunately having an offshore skippers ticket doesn't carry authority to install fixed protection in the eyes of NPWS management. Placing a bolt is also NOT an acceptable environmental impact as the natural feature (ie the rock) is willfully damaged and thus immediately contravenes the NPW Act, hence why areas like Kiera tend to be trad areas. Any other arguement is irrelevent if these two core concerns aren't met. In short - bolting is still technically illegal under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 Section 156A within any area under the service's jurisdiction and short of having the serving minister change the law, no-one can do much about it.

Just for reference:
National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 Section 156A
156A Offence of damaging reserved land

(1) A person must not, on or in land reserved under this Act or acquired under Part 11:

(a) remove any water other than for purposes authorised by or under any Act or for the purposes of personal use on the land, or

(b) damage or remove any vegetation, rock, soil, sand, stone or similar substance, or

(c) damage any object or place of cultural value, or

(d) cause or permit any removal or damage referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c).

Maximum penalty:

(a) in the case of a corporation—10,000 penalty units, or

(b) in the case of an individual—1,000 penalty units or 6 months imprisonment, or both.

(2) It is a defence to a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1) if the accused proves that the removal or damage concerned:

(a) was done in accordance with the consent of the Director-General or of a person or body that has the care, control and management of the land concerned under this Act, or

(b) was authorised to be done, and was done in accordance with, a licence under this Act or a licence granted under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, or

(c) was essential for the carrying out of:

(i) development in accordance with a development consent within the meaning of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, or

(ii) an activity, whether by a determining authority or pursuant to an approval of a determining authority within the meaning of Part 5 of that Act if the determining authority has complied with that Part, or

(iii) a project approved under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, or

(iv) State significant infrastructure approved under Part 5.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, or

(d) was authorised to be done by or under Part 2 of the Rural Fires Act 1997, the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989 or the State Emergency Service Act 1989 and was reasonably necessary in order to avoid a threat to life or property.

(3) It is a defence to a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1) if the offence relates to the damage of an object or place of cultural value and the accused proves that he or she did not know, and could not reasonably have known, that the object or place concerned had cultural value.

Hopefully that little lesson on legislation can clear up some things for people in the future.

Shame that....the West Wall and Mantleshelf routes are absolute classics. I can't really see any danger of dropping rocks onto people below so why the ban? Was there any consultation, challenge by climbers etc?

On 22/11/2012 maxdacat wrote:>On 21/11/2012 wallwombat wrote:>>Three Sisters.
...the West Wall and Mantleshelf routes are absolute classics.> I can't really see any danger of dropping rocks onto people below so why>the ban? Was there any consultation, challenge by climbers etc?

Part of the argument at the time was the erosion and impact of the access track up to the base of the cliff. The route had become a popular commercial abseil day in the 90s and people numbers had increased quite a lot. The rock-dropping danger was recognised on the east face, as the track under it is very popular, so the ban was in place there for ages, but as the west face was the main event it didn't matter too much not being able to climb on the east (though the exit from the west face topout traversed around the east side briefly, coming out on the walkway).

The original ban on the west face officially ran out some years ago but I think - and I'm sure someone here will know much better - that there was a low-key voluntary kind of consensus to keep it in place.

On 22/11/2012 Damo666 wrote:>The original ban on the west face officially ran out some years ago but>I think - and I'm sure someone here will know much better - that there>was a low-key voluntary kind of consensus to keep it in place.